Griffiths - The Role of Cognitive Bias and Skill in Fruit Machine Gambling

Question 1

3 Hypotheses

Answer 1

1. No difference in objective measures of skill between regular and non-regular gamblers
2. Regular gamblers produce more irrational verbalisations than non-regular gamblers
3. Regular and non-regular gamblers will view the skill of fruit machine playing differently.

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

To examine cognitive biases in gambling behaviour.

The study examines the behaviour of regular and non-regular gamblers when playing on fruit machines.

Question 3

Sample

Answer 3

60 participants
44 males, 16 females
23.4 mean years
30 regular gamblers, 30 non-regular gamblers
29 males, 1 female - RG: Gamble once a week or more. Mean age 21.6
15 males, 15 females - NRG: Gamble once a month or less.
From Plymouth, Devon
All participants had gambled once in their life
Volunteer sample

Question 4

Experimental method and design

Answer 4

Observation
Semi-structured interview
Content analysis of qualitative data

Question 5

Quantitative measures

Answer 5

Length of time gambling on fruit machine

Number of wins

Question 6

Qualitative measures

Answer 6

Verbalisations in “thinking aloud” groups.

This was transformed into quantitative data using content analysis.
A coding scheme was used to put utterances into categories, these were tallied and analysed (calculated as a percentage of total utterances, and analysed using t-tests).
31 different categories. 4 irrational, 27 rational.

Question 7

High Ecological Validity

Answer 7

High
~conducted in a real amusement arcade, therefore natural environment
~used regular and non-regular gamblers therefore IV occurred naturally
~used real fruit machines and money to gamble

Question 8

How were participants recruited?

Answer 8

Via adverts in local universities and colleges.

Regular gamblers recruited through a regular gambler known to the researcher.

Question 9

What were the controls in this study?

Answer 9

All participants had played on a fruit machine at least once before.
Used same fruit machine to make it a fair test so that other diced through the use of other machine could not influence the results.

Question 10

Confounding variables

Answer 10

Verbalisations were transcribed and categorised by the researcher who was not blind to the hypotheses.

Question 11

How is this study useful?

Answer 11

• The knowledge of irrational thought processes may be a help in rehabilitating “gambling addicts” through cognitive behavioural therapy.
• Can be used to help “problem gamblers” change the way they think and behave (recognise and change cognitive bias)

Question 12

Reliability and Validity of this study

Answer 12

The categorisation of the participants utterances were specific to the gambling context, which was only observed by the researcher. Therefore the reliability and validity is unknown.

Question 13

Generalisability of this study

Answer 13

• The sample is male biased, therefore it is not clear how much the findings can be generalised to females.
  However, fruit machine gambling is very male-dominated so it is not surprising that only one female regular gambler was recruited.
• Lacks generalisability to other forms of gambling eg. horse racing or roulette.

Question 14

Limitations of study

Answer 14

• It uses self report methods which may not reflect the participants real thoughts and views.
• It uses semi-structured interviews which are flexible, but open-ended questions are harder to analyse than structured interviews.
• Even though observational method has high ecological validity it is difficult to replicate.

Question 15

Method

Answer 15

Quasi-experiment due to naturally occurring IV.
2 groups of participants.
IV: regular/non-regular gambler
DV: thought processes and behaviours

Question 16

How were the results measured?

Answer 16

Cognitive activity = measured by thinking aloud

Perception of skill = measured by post-experiment semi-structured interview

Question 17

What was the procedure?

Answer 17

• Each participant given £3 to gamble on the fruit machines
• This gave 30 free gambles
• Researchers requested for them to complete a minimum of 60 gambles. If so they could keep their winnings or continue gambling.

Question 18

Thinking aloud condition - specific procedure.

Answer 18

• Half of the participants in each group were randomly assigned to the thinking aloud condition
• Given instructions in regards to verbalisations:
  ~ say everything that goes through your mind, do not censor thoughts
  ~ keep talking as continuously as possible
  ~ speak clearly
  ~ do not worry about speaking in complete sentences
  ~ do not try to justify thoughts

The thinking aloud method consists of verbalising every thought that passes through your mind when you are playing therefore it is important to remember the above in order to achieve more reliable and valid results.

Question 19

Similarities in results

Answer 19

RG & NRG has similar playing times.
RG & NRG both used more rational than irrational verbalisations.
RG & NRG showed similar skill level

Question 20

Difference in Results

Answer 20

Behavioural:
- RG has a higher playing rate per minute (8)than NRG (6).
- RG spent more time on the fruit machine.
- More RG (10) carried on until they lost all their money, than NRG (2).
Cognitive:
- RG produced significantly more irrational verbalisations than non-regular gamblers.
- RG personified the machine more than NRG.

Question 21

2 Irrational Verbalisations Examples

Answer 21

“This fruity is not in a good mood”

“It wants its money back”

Question 22

Conclusions:

Answer 22

• Findings support the hypotheses…
  ~ The difference between RG & NRG is most likely cognitive rather than down to skill
  ~ RG process information differently and believe there is more skill involved than there actually is
  ~ RG are slightly more more skilful eg. knowing the reels and when to nudge
  ~ Gamblers know they will lose but they play WITH money not FOR it (the objective is to stay on the machine)
  ~ RG make more irrational verbalisations demonstrating cognitive bias

Question 23

Name 3 Changes to this study.

Answer 23

1. Add another observer
2. Change the sample
3. Gamble with your own money

Question 24

IV

Answer 24

Regular and non-regular gamblers

Question 25

DV

Answer 25

Thought processes and behaviours

Question 26

Low Ecological validity

Answer 26

Did not use own money, given £3 to gamble with.
‘Thinking aloud condition’ had verbalisations recorded on lapel microphone, not something they would normally have done.
Asked to be in thinking aloud/not thinking aloud condition, therefore encourage unnatural behaviour.
May not usually choose to gamble on a fruit skill machine.

Question 27

3 examples of irrational verbalisations

Answer 27

“The machine likes me” - personification
“I lost there because I wasn’t concentrating” - explaining away losses
“You bastard” - swearing at the fruit machine

RG - total % irrational verbalisations = 14%
NRG - 2.5%